Re: Resources: Cementing vs. Bolstering

From: Paul King <paul_at_...>
Date: Thu, 11 Feb 2010 10:02:28 +0000

On 10 Feb 2010, at 01:52, ferguswindbag wrote:

> Intuitively, it seems as if it ought to be easier to cement a
> "Background Events" bonus than it is to "Bolster" a resource with no
> bonus (or independently of such a bonus). But HQ2 seems to imply the
> reverse: cementing is "a major goal [...] an evening's worth of
> play"; bolstering (at least on the face of it) is just a single
> contest. Doesn't this seem to imply that the background bonuses are
> effectively redundant, and if one wishes to increase any of them,
> "bolstering" is the way to go?

It isn't clear to me that bolstering is meant to be just a single contest. It could take a session of play - or more - just to get to the contest, given the example.

The other difference is that the background bonus is known in advance, while the result of bolstering depends on a contest that has yet to be rolled (and could conceivably turn out to be a penalty). If a good background bonus comes up, then cementing it is likely to be easier than bolstering to the same degree.

Powered by hypermail